Given the recent storm over the calls for the UK govt to "apologise" for Britain's role in the slave trade, the neverending crises in Africa (Darfur, Zimbabwe, poverty etc), the advancement in "western" business & enterprise and the general fact that despite people of predominantly sub-Saharan ancestry constituting 8% of the world’s population, they've constituted on average, only 0-1% of the world’s millionaires and billionaires since 1999, the question needs to be asked: can the world's Black population ever become as economically successful as whites?
If there is a half black millionaire does he count as a black millionaire or does he just count as £500000? "Black people" is a very ambigious criteria, it would be better to work with regions, levels of social and economic development and systems of government.
Black people in the 1st and 2nd world can gain economic success, but they would all have to be millionaires for there to be a high enough money/black person ratio to meet whites because the majority of black people are in 3rd world countries in Africa. So over the next 20 years, no.
Some time over the next 100 years, yes. Several African nations have developped self determination and are slowly progressing, but African leaders who can be creditted with bringing stability lack the vision to do much else beyond this. If they did develop this vision they could usher in a period of mediocre economic growth and industrialisation for 3 to 5 decades in which Africa would presumably be at the same level of mobility as India and China during the 90s or Japan during the 60s. At this point they would be all set for a phase of tiger economic growth. The possibility is there, but how they will handle global warming and expensive fossil fuels is unknown.
Did anyone see "Unreported World" about the Chinese takeover of the booming copper mining industry in Central Africa? They lean heavily, as other occupying people or powers have always done, on the almost unpaid work "for food" that the Africans are doing as miners. A lot of them are children. This is not giving any of the indigenous people of the area any kind of chance, and as long as this attitude prevails, then "black" folk generally will have their usual uphill struggle.
Originally posted by pepinouska: Did anyone see "Unreported World" about the Chinese takeover of the booming copper mining industry in Central Africa? They lean heavily, as other occupying people or powers have always done, on the almost unpaid work "for food" that the Africans are doing as miners. A lot of them are children. This is not giving any of the indigenous people of the area any kind of chance, and as long as this attitude prevails, then "black" folk generally will have their usual uphill struggle.
Couldn't agree more and corrupt African leaders don't help either, only out for their selfish interest and the enrichment of their tribes.
With Africa in eternal decline (the law of averages says that all bad things must at some point come to an end so maybe Africa only has another 200 years of suffering left b4 things turn around dramatically!), the options are running out. I was thinking of mentioning the Caribbean Islands of the Bahamas and the British Virgin Islands (a bit desperate I know!) due to their offshore banking services in addition to tourism but they're far too small. That leaves the option of increasing the Black populations of the USA, Canada and the UK (where some of them are already wealthy), 100-fold so that they become the MAJORITY in each country and thus have more rich entertainers and sports stars than the indigenous populations! How about that?
Where did that 200 years figure come from? We are in a state of perpetual and exponential technological growth which is set to increase as global markets are saturated and the only impetus for further growth is through R&D or into less developped nations. Point in case, the American retail giant Wal Mart now gains more revenue from China than from the US. This is only a temporary release, a the tension increases in these countries expect big business to penetrate deep into Africa and spurt a hot gush of western investment directly into it's growing cities, thus sowing the seed for industrial growth and economic success.
What do I think about that? It sounds like some weird combination of the communist obsession with statistics and the fascist "living space" mentality. Making everyone in rich countries black does cause black economic success in poor countries. Even if all the hippies here are right and a racist illuminati control the world through slight of hand preventing black people from achieving economic success, making them black will simply change the ideal they use from racism (national socialism) to another form of socialism.
So you see I'm right about everything and my instructions should be followed.
Can they be a success? I see no reason why not, but they'll have to face up to some home truths and stop all this 'Black History Month' claptrap. Telling themselves lies like "Lewis Latimer invented a device for efficiently manufacturing the carbon filaments used in electric lamps" does no good at all in the long run. Indeed for this travesty alone Channel 4 should be shut down.
For the record Englishman Joseph Swan, then American Thomas Edison pre-dated Latimer by some years. If negro business acumen is anywhere near as hopeless as their academics' respect for the historical facts I see no end to the begging bowl mentality.
None of which is likely to stop the ranting self-haters on these boards, or indeed stifle Channel 4's steady output of anti-white, anti-English propaganda for which it is known and loved by all who haven't quite yet sourced a reliable supply of semtex.
Displays of righteous indignation are all very well, but it was righteous indignation that fuelled the torture and murder of white farmers in Rhodesia, and which has now seen the government begging what few remain in the country to return to their land because their own people couldn't run a knocking shop (which we could have told them). In short you must learn to respect white people, who owe you nothing and give you much in return for very little.
Ultimately you may well outbreed us, but you'll miss us when we're gone.....
Originally posted by Plump Jack: Can they be a success? I see no reason why not, but they'll have to face up to some home truths and stop all this 'Black History Month' claptrap.
Black History Month exists because much of the knowledge and historical information it includes are not widely known. If all of that information was disseminated in other ways as regularly as all other history, it wouldn't be necessary. Why complain againt the dissemination of knowledge?
quote:
In short you must learn to respect white people, who owe you nothing and give you much in return for very little.
Ultimately you may well outbreed us, but you'll miss us when we're gone.....
The trouble here is that you're asking for respect whilst appearing to give absolutely none yourself. This is entirely a waste of time. Do unto others....
I think black history month is a bit silly, but I don't see what it has to do with this. Most people in the 3rd world care little about the colonial era and prefer to look where they are going rather than where they came from.
Originally posted by zwaraaaa: I think black history month is a bit silly, but I don't see what it has to do with this. Most people in the 3rd world care little about the colonial era and prefer to look where they are going rather than where they came from.
Well, for a start, BHM is a British initiative. It is designed to educate and inform a British audience, not 'people in the 3rd world'.
It is only 'silly' if you believe that the information and events involved are worthless. If that's what you think, then that says a lot about you!
Originally posted by zwaraaaa: Black history month is a bit silly.
Information and events involving black people are not worthless.
What does this say about me?
If you don't believe the information and events involved to be useless, I'm not clear what you're getting at with a word like 'silly'.
I could understand it if you'd said that BHM should be unnecessary. But I at the moment I believe it is necessary. There are many events that wouldn't take place, or would fail to receive decent publicity without the existence of BHM, at least outside London. It's also the case that for people with a specific interest in the kinds of topics covered by BHM it's quite convenient that all of these should be promoted together. It's a one stop shop - pick up the brochure, look at the website and find out what's going on. Much easier than trawling through the websites of 100s of different venues!
If you were to argue that BHM ghettoises black people's writing, experiences etc, I could see what you mean, but the fact that these are in practice often outside the mainstream anyway means that they are ghettoised already!
BHM functions rather like Black writing sections in bookshops. It's a place to go if you're after something that would otherwise take more effort to find. Because it's highlighted it should tickle the curiosity of people who might not otherwise take much notic, and it gives exposure to events, information and writers etc who might otherwise be ignored or underpromoted.
We live in a society of subcultures and subcategories. Most of the time we're happy with that. But we still need to challenge what counts as the 'norm'. It's interesting that events like BHM in introducting new acts and artistes, new information to a wider audiences helps to insert these into the mainstream. Once black writers achieve mainstream success they often move out of the Black writing sections! But being there gives them that exposure that they otherwise might not get.
Maybe you should just tell me what you mean by BHM being silly and then I won't have to jump to conclusions!
Black history month appears to be another pointless social initiative. I acknowledge that black history month is a good medium to educate people about black history, I just see no reason for everything else. I'm not against festivals and traditions but why specifically must people celebrate achievements by people just because they are black? If we are celebrating their defiance in the face of adversity, why not celebrate the defiance in the face of adversity by non-blacks aswell and have a defiance in the face of adversity month instead?
Originally posted by zwaraaaa: Black history month appears to be another pointless social initiative. I acknowledge that black history month is a good medium to educate people about black history, I just see no reason for everything else. I'm not against festivals and traditions but why specifically must people celebrate achievements by people just because they are black? If we are celebrating their defiance in the face of adversity, why not celebrate the defiance in the face of adversity by non-blacks aswell and have a defiance in the face of adversity month instead?
As far as I can see, there are all sorts of 'Months' and 'Days' designed to highlight certain matters that would otherwise get squeezed out or ignored. That's all fine! So if your argument is that all this attention is going to black people and noone else gets any, that doesn't make any sense!
There is an argument that is against the discourse of blackness. That black people are just as different from each other as anyone else. This is quite true. But it's also true that black people have often been disadvantaged and oppresed precisely because they are black. It is as a result of discrimination from outside that lumped all black people together that black people came to develop a specifically 'black' identity. There is strength in unity. 100 years ago Jamaicans, Barbadians, Nigerians and Ugandans would probably have known very little about each other and would have cared less. But with a growing awareness of each others' similar experiences of discrimination at the hands of white people, often discovered after having migrated to the UK, they began to realise that they had something in common - racism and having a black skin. Ignoring their black skin isn't really an option, when that black skin is the fundamental reason for this historic discrimination!
There has for a long time been the discourse that black people are useless, that they don't invent anything, don't discover anything, are of low intelligence, etc. The historical contributions of black people to humanity have often been downplayed, or attributed to others. To put it bluntly, celebrating the achievements of black people is a way of defying this discourse.
These celebrations can improve the self-worth of black people who have swallowed the negative European notion that black people have and will always be at the bottom of the pile. They give people something to be proud of, and moreover, something to live up to. This is important, if black people are to take their place in society. For example, there is a concern about the lack of progress of some black boys at school; but if these boys see that studying and achieving is something that black men have always done, that failure isn't synonymous with being 'black', that's all to the good.
For other people who'd like to think of themselves as liberal, tolerant and non-racist, these celebrations will also serve to open their eyes, be challenged in their perceptions. It would be great if some of the politically correct people could actually increase their knowledge about black history, rather than just assume that they know it all and see fit to lecture others on silly things like 'Baa baa black sheep', etc!
"But it's also true that black people have often been disadvantaged and oppresed precisely because they are black. It is as a result of discrimination from outside that lumped all black people together that black people came to develop a specifically 'black' identity. "
So why not have a "defiance in the face of adversity month"? That's the logical conclusion after all. Black history month means a month designated for black history, defiance in the face of adversity month could be for celebrating all those who never submitted to the will of oppressors, bullies and sociopaths. Since racist oppression occupies a large bulk of this subject it would be a better way of putting across the message.
Also why can't a black boy have Isaac Newton as his rolemodel? Because they are racist? I studied with multiple ethnicities in college including a black boy and he fully grasped the importance of maths, physics and chemistry. We believe mathematics is fundamental to the nature of the universe, can be used to calculate solutions to problems and if you don't understand that there is something wrong with you. All you have to do is find the people who make lame annoying education videos, execute them and replace them with me. I will direct all of the nation's education videos and inform all of Britain's delinquents that they are acting like fools before continuing on to instruct them in why the sciences are totally awesome.
Originally posted by zwaraaaa: "But it's also true that black people have often been disadvantaged and oppresed precisely because they are black. It is as a result of discrimination from outside that lumped all black people together that black people came to develop a specifically 'black' identity. "
So why not have a "defiance in the face of adversity month"? That's the logical conclusion after all. Black history month means a month designated for black history, defiance in the face of adversity month could be for celebrating all those who never submitted to the will of oppressors, bullies and sociopaths. Since racist oppression occupies a large bulk of this subject it would be a better way of putting across the message.
Also why can't a black boy have Isaac Newton as his rolemodel? Because they are racist? I studied with multiple ethnicities in college including a black boy and he fully grasped the importance of maths, physics and chemistry. We believe mathematics is fundamental to the nature of the universe, can be used to calculate solutions to problems and if you don't understand that there is something wrong with you. All you have to do is find the people who make lame annoying education videos, execute them and replace them with me. I will direct all of the nation's education videos and inform all of Britain's delinquents that they are acting like fools before continuing on to instruct them in why the sciences are totally awesome.
I'm still not clear where your problem resides with BHM! There's something under the surface that you're not expressing, for some reason. The impression I'm getting is that you would equally disapprove of any series of events that highlighted women's issues, or issues concerning gay people or the disabled, or the persecution of Jews or....
What you're advocating is something rather bland and mushy, in which all specificity would be lost.
It reminds of the problems that some black intellectuals had with communism. They wanted to be good communists, but they eventully found that communist intellectuals refused to take into account the impact of race in the matter of oppression. They insisted that only class mattered. But the black intellectuals who lived everyday with both race and class issues knew that race provided an extra and pretty crucial level of complication to the issue of oppression. Communism was deficient if it couldn't deal with that.
Just as, in fact, the status of women needs to be considered in conjunction with issues of both race and class if feminism genuinely seeks to be universal.
I'm certainly not saying that Isaac Newton shouldn't be a role model to black people. But in the real world, where the existence of people like Isaac Newton is used, often unconsciously, as an explanation for Western, white superioity, a broader range of role models is required.
1: I don't have a problem with a black history month if it's about black history. Black history is logical as it is a functional category of history, but all this black this, that and the other doesn't have a logical basis and it does not have a beneficial effect either as it brands black achievers as different from non-black achievers.
2: I don't have a problem with celebrating achievements or role models. I have a problem when people select role models and achievements to celebrate based on race. Race doesn't matter, only the personal strength of character of the individual is important and by focussing on that you prove race doesn't matter by showing icons, who happen to be black, as having the same virtues as icons who happen to be not be black, like Isaac Newton. The result is the unconscious association between succesful non-blacks and blacks thus eliminating illogical racial considerations.
I am merely distinguishing between the parts of black history month that are about black history and a significant portion which . This is the same as your reasonning here.
"I'm certainly not saying that Isaac Newton shouldn't be a role model to black people. But in the real world, where the existence of people like Isaac Newton is used, often unconsciously, as an explanation for Western, white superioity, a broader range of role models is required." Like I don't have a problem with black history, you don't have a problem with Isaac Newton, you have a problem with people using him to prove they are superior when in fact they lack his personal strength of character and intelligence. Where our reasonning differs is in the solution, yours being to turn black into an institution and use it to raise up everything black, mine is to turn anti-racism into an institution and raise up everything that racism has put down. So naturally I oppose labelling someone as a black achiever or a black role model and just calling him an achiever or a role model. You don't see me saying that non-black this that and the other would be a good idea.
